APHC010452092025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9044 OF 2025 Between: Thonduri China Babu, S/o.Rama Mohana Rao, aged 36 years, R/o.Yadava Bazaar, Near Ramalayam, Movva Village, Movva Mandal, Krishna District. ...Petitioner/Accused AND 1. Abburi Ratna Kumari, D/o.Venkateswara Rao, aged about 59 years R/o.D.No.4-145, Vidyadharapura Colony, Movva Village and Mandal within the limits of Kuchipudi P.S. 2. The State, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati. ...Respondents Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to set aside the Order dated 03-04-2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.48 of 2025 in Criminal Appeal No.140 of 2025, on the file of the Court of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Machilipatnam (Now renumbered as CrI.Appeal No.25 of 2025, on the file of the Court of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Avanigadda) lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition filed under Section 582 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with the filing of certified copy of the Judgment and Sentence, dated 05-03-2025, passed by on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, in C.C.No.266 of 2019. lA NO: 2 0F 2025 Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the execution of Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW), dated 28-07-2025, issued in Criminal Appeal No.25 of 2025, on the file of the Court of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Avanigadda. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Yadavalli Ramesh Counsel for the Respondent No.1:~ Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Additional Public Prosecutor The Court made the following: V APHC010452092025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9044/2025 Between: 1.THONDUR1 CHINA BABU, S/0 RAMA MOHANA RAO, AGED 36 MOVVA R/0 YADAVA BAZAAR, NEAR RAMALAYAM YEARS VILLAGE, MOVVA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.ABBURI RATNA KUMARI, D/0 VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/0 D.NO.4-145, VIDYADHARAPURA COLONY, MOVVA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, WITHIN THE LIMITS OF KUCHIPUDI P.S. 2.THE STATE, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATI. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Courtmay be pleased to set aside the order dated 03-04-2025 passed in CrI.M.P.No. 48 of 2025 in Criminal Appeal No. 140 of 2025, on the file of the Court of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Machilipatnam (Now renumbered as CrI.Appeal No.25 of 2025, on the file of the Court of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Avanigadda) and pass such lA NO: 1 OF 2025 I 2 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to dispense with the filing of certified copy of the Judgment and Sentence, dated 05-03-2025, passed by on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, in C.C.No.266 of 2019, and pass such lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to to stay the execution of Non- Bailable Warrant (NBW), dated 28-07-2025, issued in Criminal Appeal No. 25 of 2025, on the file of the Court of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Avanigadda and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.YADAVALLI RAMESH Counsel for the Respondent/complainant{S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2. The Court made the following ORDER: The instant petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita has been filed, by the Petitioner/ Accused, seeking quashment of the order in Crl.M.P.No.48 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.140 of 2025, on the file of the Court Additional District and Sessions Judge, Machiiipatnam (Now renumbered as CrI.Appeal No.25 of 2025 Additional District and Sessions Judge, Avanigadda) Heard Sri Yadavalli Ramesh, learned counsel for the of the VI on the file of the Court of the VI 2. Petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State/Respondent. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner and acceded to, by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the subject Criminal Petition is squarely covered by the Order passed by this Court Criminal Petition No.5914 of 2024, dated 28.08.2024, wherein, it was held at paras 7 and 8 as under: matter of this vide 7. The Hon ble Supreme Court in Jamboo Bhandari Vs. M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Limited and Others^ referring above para in the case of Surinder Singh Deswai @ Coionel S.S.Deswai and others, held in paras 6 to 9 as under: 6. What is held by this Court is that a purposive interpretation should be made of Section 148 of the N.l. Act. Hence, normally. Appellate Court will be justified in imposing the condition of deposit as provided in Section 148. However, in a case where the Appellate Court is satisfied that the condition of deposit of 20% will be unjust or imposing such a condition will amount to deprivation of the right of appeal of the appellant, exception can ^ 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 776 . t be made for the reasons specifically recorded. 7. Therefore, when Appellate Court considers the prayer under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. of an accused who has been convicted for offence under Section 138 of the N.l. Act, it is always open for the Appellate Court to consider whether it is an exceptional case which warrants grant of suspension of sentence without imposing the condition of deposit of 20% of the fine/compensation amount. As stated earlier, if the Appellate Court comes to the conclusion that it is an exceptional case, the reasons for coming to the said conclusion must be recorded. The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the original complainant is that neither before the Sessions Court nor before the High Court, there was a plea made by the appellants that an exception may be made in these cases and the reguirement of deposit or minimum 20% of the amount be dispensed with. He submits that if such a prayer was not made by the appellants, there were no reasons for the Courts to consider the said plea. 9. We disagree with the above submission. When an accused applies under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence, he normally applies for grant of relief of suspension of sentence without any condition. Therefore, when a blanket order is sought by the appellants, the Court has to consider whether the case falls in exception or not. ” 8. Therefore, in the light of above judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, normally, the Appellate Court will be justified in imposing condition of deposit as provided in Section 148 of N.l.Act. However, in a case, whether the Appellate Court is satisfied with the condition of deposit of 20%) will be unjust, exception can be made for the reason specifically recorded. Hence, when the Appellate Court considers an application filed U/s. 389(3) Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 430 of BNSS by the drawer of the cheque 8. 5 (accused), who was convicted for the offence U/s.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, the Appellant Court has to consider whether it is exceptional case which warrants grant of suspension of sentence without imposing condition of deposit of 20% of fine/compensation amount. If the Appellate Court comes to said conclusion that it is an exceptional case, reasons for coming to such conclusion must be recorded. ” Considering the submissions made and following the Order passed by this Court in Criminal Petition No.5914 of 2024, dated 28.08.2024, this Criminal Petition is allowed. The impugned order of the learned Appellate Court is set side and restoring the application filed by the appellant U/s.389 (3) Cr.P.C., corresponding to section 430 of BNSS before the Appellate Court. The petitioner/accused shall appear before the learned Appellate Court in 10 (ten) days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. On such appearance, the learned Appellate Court shall consider the application afresh and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible, preferably within seven (07) days. Till then, the sentence imposed by the learned trial Court stands suspended. If the petitioner/accused fails to appear before the learned Appellate Court as directed above, the Criminal Petition stands dismissed without recourse to the Court. 4. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K J RAJA BABU assistant registrar 0 //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, Judge, Avanigadda, Krishna 1 The VI Additional District and Sessions District. (BY SPEED POST) 2. The Judicial Magistrate 3. Thonduri China Babu, S/o.Rama R/o.Yadava Bazaar, Near Ramalayam Krishna District. of First Class, Movva, Krishna District. Mohana Rao, aged 36 years, , Movva Village, Movva Mandal, I V 4. One CC to Sri Yadavalli Ramesh, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 6. Two CD Copies BSV vna HIGH COURT DATED:02/09/2025 ORDER IT I 8 SEP 2025 )% ^isQurrMtSictmy^^ CRLP NO. 9044 OF 2025 ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION